ESF Hover Ability Removal

So that's a yes, then.

Hornets are really quite powerful, you know.

That's why I said to give them much higher resistances against air, so that air can't just destroy the turrets. But AA turrets don't kill nearly that quickly unless you are the perfect distance away from them, and stay there for the whole time.

Because they are useless against literally everything else. The sole reason for their existence to prevent air from stomping all over everyone else.

To say that an ESF requires skill is absurd. To fly, definitely. But to hover semi-decently and spam rockets down on infantry? It would be harder to kill yourself with a grenade.

Why do you keep misquoting everything I say? Lol, that is usually the domain of hack journalism but I digress...

Okay I take it you don't fly very often, let me just say that as a pilot I can't recall how many times I have been fighting other aircrafts, some other ESFs or a liberator and be super focused on the other fighter, then start taking flak and die only to look on the death screen and see a Phalanx Turret with 50% or more of the damage on me. As is, they are super-annoying to a pilot regardless of whether you are flying A2A or A2G.

Also it's not uncommon to be "sniped" by an AA turret when you're on the edge of their range without realizing it and they do just enough damage to get an assist on you when you get killed by something else in the sky in your weakened state.

It's actually completely the other way around, believe it or not. Flying forwards is relatively simple, but hovering in a way which both keeps your aim steady and makes you a difficult target to hit takes some of the most skill in PS2. Simply hovering without keeping your momentum = suicide , generally

Well, I asked you the question, which you neglected to answer, and supported a position highly favourable to aircraft. Naturally, this lead me to such a bold conclusion.

That is correct, I typically avoid flying in favour of other methods of transportation, I'm no skyknight, and I dislike A2G combat, so there isn't much reason for me to.

Then quite frankly, you were flying too low. The projectile velocity of the AA turrets is abysmal. So much so, that dogfighting aircraft at high altitudes are literally impossible to accurately lead do to the constant changing velocities and trajectories. Sure one could simply pepper the general area, but then they'd run the risk of friendly fire, with minimal damage done to the enemy.

As I said, the AA turret's projectile velocity is quite frankly, pathetic. One would have to remain largely stationary for at least one to two full seconds to be hit by the first shot of a burst. However, I could totally see the aircraft suffering a large hit from the one to two second long burst that is likely drilling into them.

Sure, anyone can lilt off and fly straight. I was mostly referring to A2A combat and maneuvering in tight environments.

As I said, I don't fly much. However, I've dicked around in the VR long enough to know that, in a scythe at least, all one really has to do to hover smoothly is slow down in the air. Combine that with some point-and-click simplicity missiles and you're good to go.

Here is where the ESF is way overpowered: not in big battles since it will be dealt with if it chooses to stay hover too long and mostly is seen running bomb runs but in smaller fights 12-24 battles. In this small scale battles there is not enough players to give it any kill factor and is able to stay Hovered without much resistance. This is what needs to get balanced. Removing hover will force them to act as in big battles and do runs instead of playing deadly stationary air turret.

Let's recap:
I pointed out how you repeatedly tried to deflect the subject, tried to make it seem like I was incapable of making an opinion, tried to make it look like your experience in playing the game is somehow important to gauge the effect a change of game mechanics has (IE experience you can't have because it's not there) and how this is somehow more important experience than, say, multiple developers who do research and have tons of experience with it which I used as a reference to back my claims up.
Please note that each and every time it was complete and utter nonsense.

Then, just like I do with any person who keeps repeating that crap over and over again, I stop calling them out on it and start calling them for what they are: Trolls and hypocrites. I even provided the proof that you were exactly a hypocrite, what more do you want? Oh yeah, you are a troll and a hypocrite, so you again have to attack me personally rather than my arguments, good going! You proved my point once again!

He used to have more sense in him.

No need to disable the weapons, that's a bit hamfisted. If they ever did this (they shouldn't) then they should reduce the maneuverability while in hover mode. IE they can turn and yaw very slowly, and their fall speed when their engine's aren't pointing downwards would be high.

There, you fixed it without an arbitrary weapon lock rule. They can barely use themselves as some kind of supa-dupa turret when in hover mode which can easily be explained by saying that they are using flaps and aerodynamics to steer for the most part.

Again, I don't want just A2A combat, I want the current A2A combat improved. That would almost always mean that their capabilities against ground units are improved as well, which means they need a boost as well.

Now the vehicle is powerful, but I'm not looking at just the vehicle's power, I'm looking at it's usage.
No one can deny that the air-game is populated only by the die-hards, the players that dedicated themselves to it. The average player tries it occasionally and then just quits due to the complete lack of progress when they meet either an A2A pilot who crushes them without even a hint of getting close to losing or they meet AA which you can only avoid by flying away.

So rather than stick with "but that vehicle is so OP!" I'm trying to make it better for everyone. Improving the air-game should be one of the top priorities on the developers lists (and should have been from day 1). Yes, the vehicle is OP, yes this would improve the vehicle even more against ground targets... But we can solve that problem as well. The G2A system has been in need of an overhaul just as long as the A2A system needed it, and since the two subjects are linked no matter what you do you might as well fix them in one glorious update.

I'll debate that!

Let's see...
Vehicles on their semi-2D ground need to path their way to the objective, keep in mind the paths the enemy/allies could take to the objective, need to know the relative position of enemy and friendly forces to determine what area's are safe and which one's aren't and they need to have an idea of the composition of friendly/enemy forces to have an idea where his weapons would be useful and what type of weapons might take a shot at him, not to mention that they need to be careful in their positioning to make sure they aren't flanked and receive additional damage.

Now aircraft:
In a 3D environment they have no constraints whatsoever. They can ignore enemy troop positioning for the most part, don't need to fear flanking attacks or ambushes and they can fly in straight lines to their objective. Don't like a fight? They can leave in a snap and be in the next fight several bases over faster than a tank can drive from one base to the next.
So are aircraft more complex because of the 3D movement? Nope. Aircraft's control scheme might be a bit more intricate due to the extra directions you can move in, but that does not mean that the skill required is automatically higher.

Most people instantly scream at the top of their lungs "Aircraft have the highest skill ceiling!" Even though they don't know the skill it requires to, for instance, hit an aircraft with a dumbfire at 100m distance. Or get two HEAT shells into an ESF with a tank. Actually hit an aircraft that is trying to dodge you. These things take far more skill, especially because there's so much RNG involved it's also a poker game where you try to determine your enemies next move before he makes it, adjust for that, fire and hope he actually does that.
Skill and skill ceiling can be massively different depending on how you use a weapon and against what. It's much easier for ESF to hit ground vehicles because the vehicles don't have that difficult control scheme that allows them to fly in multiple directions. In fact, an ESF could potentially use the same easy controls as a ground vehicle and only use the nose to turn... You don't get the most out of it, but it's fully possible. The higher difficulty of being able to go up and down is easily offset by the fact that you don't have to path or keep in mind enemy positioning as much.

They are nerfing ESF nose guns including LPPA, Airhammer, and Banshee on PTS. No point in beating this dead horse until The changes are worked out.

When you propose major game shifts like this everything else has to be readjusted. I don't support these kinds of moves because its what makes the game unique. We would all love to bring in components of our favorite games but that does not always mean its for the better.

Just going to treat you like the other millenials who throw tantrums when they lose an argument. When you stop acting like that I'll give you respect again. Until then go fuq yourself.

This. All day this. And im not a pilot. I like flying in this game actually, its pretty cool, but I suck so bad at it that I dont bother.

We need things that bolster the air game, not more nerfs. Maybe if we got more people interested in air there would be some noobs out there and I could actually get into an airiel fight and not die in 2 seconds. I might enjoy myself. Right now the 20 or so hardcore flyers per faction that actually play air are faaaaar too good for anyone else to join in and enjoy themselves.

And that's entirely fine! Good, in fact. But I don't feel that that should carry over to the already advantageous A2G.

Well that's the problem, it's almost impossible to improve the A2A capabilities without buffing the A2G capabilities.

However, G2A has been in dire need of an update as well. Right now it's either not good enough and aircraft can farm without any real fear of dying or it completely annihilates aircraft, which isn't a good system for either.

o.0 I've completely annihilated you in your "arguments". You have done nothing to support your claims, have made a fool out of yourself and now for the umptillionth time you try to attack me personally rather than my arguments.

Good troll man!

You haven't given any evidence nor facts. And that was only the first time I attacked you, after you attacked me numerous times. But like I said, you don't get anymore discussion. Just derails from now on. Have fun with that. It is what you wanted.

I obviously agree with your sentiments about the sorry state of ground-based AA.

But I think we'll just have to agree to disagree, because clearly both of us are sticking to our guns here.

You have been doing nothing but derailing.

My first post:
I explain to you how kills and killboards the way you display them are useless.
I go on to explain how the game can be improved, and back that up with the experience of multiple developers who talk about game design.
Your reply:
I'll get my info from my own experience. Insult to the guys making the video.

Were we talking about experience? No we were talking about what kill statistics mean. And even so you don't give any reasons as to why your experience should be better than that of myself or 4+ developers.

Then I reply to you again, stating that you are deflecting the subject.
Your reply:
What are the experiences of the developers I used?

Again a deflect, you have completely lost track what we are talking about (how kill statistics work) and keep going about how experience in the game is somehow important, even though we are talking about a change in the game and how it would affect the game, IE something that you can't have experience in by playing the game since it's not in the game.

My reply:
I point out how irrelevant that XP is same as I did just above, and how the subject is completely different.
Your reply:
I have experience in developing, and without checking credentials or proving anything my credentials trump that of the one who made the video (ignoring the other developers who helped him build it). You go on to say that something that can get kills isn't necessarily good... Again you say "it might be good" and provide no evidence that it's good or not. But it's irrelevant, since we aren't talking about how good it is, but how the gameplay decides if a mechanic, vehicle or weapon is fun to fight against.
Your experience is irrelevant again. Let's draw a parallel: You have a mathematical genius, and some high school kids. The high school kids solve 2*2=4. Does that make them wrong because they have less experience? No.
So regardless of your "experience", you have to prove that both me and those guys are wrong, rather than boasting that you are better somehow and doing nothing more.

My reply:
Hey, my first sideways insult towards you saying I feel sorry for your colleagues. You have so far degraded me and 4+developers 3 times, 3, and this is the first time I do even a slight insult. For the 3rd time I try to correct you on the subject we are talking about. I correct you on the "fun facts" because you somehow make the assumption that aircraft are hovering about when there's AA around, and saying that the removal of hover mode would mean they would be flying around rather than hovering when there's AA around. Which is completely dog poo because aircraft don't hover about when there's AA around, they already fly around.
I correct you again because you suddenly assume I was advocating the removal of hover mode, incorrectly, again. And then I point out with insults that you have been wrong all the time so far.
Your reply:
Rather than reply to whatever has been said, I'll now attack Demigan even more personally, saying that he is constantly doing these insults. Oh and I'll throw in that Demigan has been derailing the thread even though I've not talked about the subject at hand once in my conversations with Demigan.

My reply:
I make a small recap of everything that happened so far.
Your reply:
Yet another insult at my persona. It's a habit with you isn't it? Assuming I'm born in the new millenia and degrading the intelligence of everyone in it assuming 100% of them are whiney little *******.


Dear Taemien: I realize you are starved for attention and that you are having a hard time, but that's no excuse for this nonsense. Get your crap together and finally say something sensible.

Or we could come with a different solution.

I thought it would be good to kill 2 birds with one stone: Destabilize the G2A vs A2G game even further by updating the A2A combat so that people will finally accept the necessary changes for G2A weaponry.

But if you disagree I would want to see a different solution. Dumbing down the A2A game by removing hover mode doesn't seem to be a good solution, I've explained the effect it would have because the game would revolve more about who starts chasing who first rather than the skill of the players because of the rest of the maneuvers you can pull off in the A2A game are more likely to give your opponent an advantage than yourself.

So let's start from the other side: How would you upgrade the G2A game? If you are upgrading the G2A game, could you perhaps instantly include something to make it capable of punishing hovering ESF so that this ability becomes less universally used? That would already remove a lot of the necessity for removing Hover mode in the first place.
Then the A2A game needs an update... Can you give an example how that can be improved without buffing the A2G capabilities? The only thing I could think off is adding more inertia so that it takes longer to change directions, this increases the time before your opponent can react and track you when you veer off to a certain direction, and allows you to keep ahead of them with multiple maneuvers. Due to this inertia you have to predict ahead of time when you need to break off an attack, and have much more trouble tracking vehicles on the ground and especially more trouble tracking infantry. Unfortunately such a debuff of all A2G activities with an updated G2A game would almost surely be the end of the G2A game, and players would have an even higher skill floor for learning to fly the basics.